WWI Result without American Involvement

[The Sandman]

Why, oh god why, would Czechs gravitate towards something they have resoundingly said NO! seventy years beforehand?

Well, if they have to choose between German domination or Hungarian domination, which one are they more likely to pick? While the idea of the Czechs actually joining Germany is absurd (for one thing, Imperial Germany probably doesn't want more non-Germans), it's not unlikely that Czechia would fall within the German economic and military sphere.

 

[Timmy811]

If anyone can get in touch with Tom B1 over at Grey Wolf's board, he would probably have some useful info on this subject.

IIRC, the French made up a significant portion of their OTL shortfall in various raw materials (particularly nitrates) by importing from the US; given true US neutrality, those imports might dry up.

Oh, and if we need a POD to cause American neutrality, here's one possibility: German spies somehow find out about the sizeable load of munitions that the Lusitania was carrying on her OTL last voyage. While unrestricted submarine warfare has been declared, an exception is to be made in this case. Instead of being sunk outright, the Lusitania is stopped and boarded by the German submarine that sank her in OTL.

The resulting news of the British knowingly putting American citizens at risk by illegaly loading war materials onto a civilian vessel (thus making her a legitimate target) sparks a "plague on both your houses) reaction in the US, with the US declaring complete neutrality in the conflict.

I like that idea, very clever.

 

[Gladi]

Well, if they have to choose between German domination or Hungarian domination, which one are they more likely to pick? While the idea of the Czechs actually joining Germany is absurd (for one thing, Imperial Germany probably doesn't want more non-Germans), it's not unlikely that Czechia would fall within the German economic and military sphere.

Hungarian domination? Hmm 8 million Czechs, 4 million Slovaks versus 12 milion Hungarians, with former having triple or more industry of later?

 

[The Sandman]

Hungarian domination? Hmm 8 million Czechs, 4 million Slovaks versus 12 milion Hungarians, with former having triple or more industry of later?

Are the Czechs ready to fight the Hungarians over Slovakia between 1918-20? More to the point, are they ready to fight alone? And maintaining total freedom from German influence might be tricky, given that Germany would surround Czechia on three sides (because I am betting that a surviving Imperial Germany would claim Austria when A-H collapses).

Also, Germany is likely to have something to say about the Czechs pursuing a completely independent foreign and economic policy.

 

[Gladi]

Are the Czechs ready to fight the Hungarians over Slovakia between 1918-20? More to the point, are they ready to fight alone?

They were OTL. And what arcane PoD are you using to keep Romania out of the fight? Further what witchery are you using to make Germany strong enough to have any say in it? Becuase if A-H folds the game is over for Germans.

 

[M79]

I posited A-H folding even with a CP victory between 1925 and 1935. If Galicia and Austria join Germany then Czechs are surrounded on 3 sides by Germany and the other by Hungary. I figured they join Germany outright or become a satellite.

 

[The Sandman]

They were OTL. And what arcane PoD are you using to keep Romania out of the fight? Further what witchery are you using to make Germany strong enough to have any say in it? Becuase if A-H folds the game is over for Germans.

First, all Romania did was help stave off the German collapse by providing a new region to loot for food; they unarguably had the single worst performance of any combatant on either side.

Second, by 1917 the Germans were pretty much fighting alone anyway, so A-H going down won't hurt much, as long as it falls apart after Italy is knocked out. Unless I'm much mistaken, the Swiss probably gave the Germans more assistance in the West than A-H did.

As I have now said multiple times, if the US doesn't get involved the war will end in 1918 because no one will have enough troops left to fight. Tactically, it ends in a stalemate; strategically, it would end in a German victory as the fighting would end with Germans still in Belgium and northern France, and Brest-Litovsk would be accepted by default.

As for how Germany would be strong enough to have any say in postwar Czechia: well, how about the fact that the Germans have a much larger population, much more industry, control over almost all of Czechia's routes to the outside world, and a firm conviction that, with the war "won", Central Europe should be their playground? Not to mention that, in the event that the Germans try something, I doubt the Hungarians or Slovakians would offer much assistance to the Czechs.

Think 1938 and you'll about have the fate of Czechia in TTL, except that Imperial Germany would probably leave Bohemia and Moravia with nominal independence.

 

[luakel]

Second, by 1917 the Germans were pretty much fighting alone anyway, so A-H going down won't hurt much, as long as it falls apart after Italy is knocked out. Unless I'm much mistaken, the Swiss probably gave the Germans more assistance in the West than A-H did.

I'm going to agree here. Even if all of Germany's other allies are dead, it's going to be tough for the French and British to send forces through the confused mishmash that used to be the Austrian Empire.

 

[Larrikin]

More equitable?

Nice idea for a POD to keep the Americans out of the war.

Oh, and I'd really have to argue for a CP win or at least a more equitable peace. The French and Italians were on their last legs, the Russians were out of the fighting... Austria-Hungary might have managed to actually hold together for a little longer.
As for the whole thing with Bulgaria, maybe some German troops from the eastern front could have been sent there, since a knock-out blow against the western allies wasn't so critical?
Just a thought...

Lets see, the CP started the whole bloody shooting match, the Germans spent the war raping Belgium and fought their western campaign camped in France's main industrial area, whilst the A-H's were out to annex all of the Southern Slavs. What do you think would be more equitable?

Personally, I think they should have stripped the Ruhr of industrial and mining equipment to replace that destroyed or stolen from France and Belgium, and reduced Germany to an agrarian economy for a generation or two.

Both the A-H and Ottoman Empires were already coming apart at the seams, and the best thing that could have happened to both of them was the break up, and in the case of the Ottomans, the secularization of Turkey.

 

[Fenwick]

Lets see, the CP started the whole bloody shooting match, the Germans spent the war raping Belgium and fought their western campaign camped in France's main industrial area, whilst the A-H's were out to annex all of the Southern Slavs. What do you think would be more equitable?

Personally, I think they should have stripped the Ruhr of industrial and mining equipment to replace that destroyed or stolen from France and Belgium, and reduced Germany to an agrarian economy for a generation or two.

Both the A-H and Ottoman Empires were already coming apart at the seams, and the best thing that could have happened to both of them was the break up, and in the case of the Ottomans, the secularization of Turkey.

Well if the Allies win, then you can expect a serious land grab. Either France out right takes the Ruhr, and the Rhine, or makes "independent" nations.

 

[blysas]

We see that if the war drags on, things are going to turn nasty for both sides, both sides will drive eachother to a stalemate. However, what will kick the bucket for the War will be the whole front being fcused on the west until they can open up landings inot greece.

 

[Gladi]

snip

And I still disagree. Brits have another million troops in Britian ready. Czechs have over hundred thousand Czech-Americans coming in early 1918 (strange how ethnic nationalism works). The Balkan theater just folded for CP.

 

[Redbeard]

Everybody mentions the big morale boost the US war entry had in April 1917. I do not doubt that, but I will also claim that Russia quitting in late 1917 must have been an even bigger blow for the Entente. USA's entry surely gave promisses of the future, but Russia quitting here and now removed a huge number of troops from the entente and heavily incresed the number available to the CP for deployment on the west front.

So no matter if USA had entered the war or not the question was if the Entente, on its own, could resist the comming German offensive with the forces "freed" from the East front. If the offensive could be stopped, it was obvious that Germany would not have the resources to do it again, but a US contribution to the counteroffensive would be a welcome aid to share the losses to be expected in the "final kill". If the comming German offensive could not be stopped, a US declaration of war from April 1917 would be of no use whatsoever as it would have extremely long prospects if any, before a US-British invasion of the European continent could be successfully launched, and UK anyway was safe from German invasion in any foreseeable future.

That offensive started in March 1918, at a time when there only was a few thousand US troops in France, and was stopped by April without USA giving any significant contribution. The US contribution only weighed in by Autumn 1918, when the Entente started to conterattack. Without the US forces I doubt the Entente by 1918 would have been able to have the German front dissolve, but the Fuller (armoured) offensive of 1919 might have done the trick. BTW the British units having suffered the most in the spring offensive (5th Army) were already by mid April back on near full strength in both men and materiel, showing that UK by this time did not have significant manpower or materiel problems. The French were not to the same degree in the firing line, but it appears like the French Army had overcome its 1917 crisis.

Some have proposed the effect of US finances on the Entente cause. They of course must have had an effect, as UK and France after the war owed money to various Americans, but I question to what degree that was dependent on a US declaration of war, and if the DoW had any effect I doubt it would be much before march 1918. A netral status rarely has meant not trading with the belligerent nations, I guess on the contrary, and that neutrality rather means that you can expect a higher profit on your prducts (incl. money) as there are no "special price for you my allied friend". In this context the Entente probably got some decords from the USA, but OTOH they would not have to supply the AEF with heavy weapons and planes as in OTL if USA stays neutral.

But USA's entry certainly had a very important impact - it made it possibe for the Entente to decisively beat the CP in late 1918 which again was the prerequisite for Versailles and after that WWII. The Fuller plan of 1919 might have achieved the same without US contribution, but I'm not sure if the Entente by 1919 would/could take the losses necessary to achieve the same degree of breakdown in the German army. The Germans would have been aware of that, and so an armistice on more balanced conditions (but still a Entente victory) would have been more possible - which again makes WWII less possible.

So all in all - the US entry in WWI created WWII (among other things) - which is quite ironic as Wilson had the best intentions. But the biggest crimes/errors are often made with the best intentions.

Regards

Steffen Redbeard

 

[The Sandman]

And I still disagree. Brits have another million troops in Britian ready. Czechs have over hundred thousand Czech-Americans coming in early 1918 (strange how ethnic nationalism works). The Balkan theater just folded for CP.

I'm talking about post-war, in a world where the Americans didn't enter and Imperial Germany survives as a result. In that world, post-war, an independent Czechia is going to have problems.

The Balkans were, by the end of the war, a sideshow; the war was going to be decided on the Western Front. Or do you propose that the Allied forces in the Balkans would march all the way from Salonika to Berlin without any opposition whatsoever?

And where exactly did you get that figure of a million extra men ready in Britain? If they really had a million spare troops to throw at the Germans in 1917-18, don't you think they would have used them, rather than allowing US involvement in the war and therefore at the peace table?

Oh, and in case you didn't read the thread title, the Americans aren't coming in to save the Entente. So, unless your hundreds of thousands of Czech-Americans decide to join the Canadian Army in order to fight against the side the European Czechs are on, I don't think they'll be able to do much more than sit and spin as far as WWI is concerned.

 

[The Sandman]

The Fuller plan of 1919 might have achieved the same without US contribution, but I'm not sure if the Entente by 1919 would/could take the losses necessary to achieve the same degree of breakdown in the German army. The Germans would have been aware of that, and so an armistice on more balanced conditions (but still a Entente victory) would have been more possible - which again makes WWII less possible.

The problem with the scenario you propose is that any cease-fire that occurs without the German Army having been shattered as per OTL is, in the strategic sense, a win for Germany. This is because the war would then presumably end with Germans still in Belgium and maybe parts of northern France, and (unlike in OTL) the Entente would not have the ability to evict them further. This leaves Germany in a much better negotiating position from the get-go.

More importantly, however, a failure by the Entente to decisively beat the Germans means that Brest-Litovsk is not invalidated, with the result that a huge chunk of European Russia becomes what amounts to an economic colony of Germany.

 

[Gladi]

I'm talking about post-war, in a world where the Americans didn't enter and Imperial Germany survives as a result. In that world, post-war, an independent Czechia is going to have problems.

I am not saying it will sleep on roses. But I am saying it won't be ocupied by Germans within a year.

The Balkans were, by the end of the war, a sideshow; the war was going to be decided on the Western Front. Or do you propose that the Allied forces in the Balkans would march all the way from Salonika to Berlin without any opposition whatsoever?

But collapse of A-H makes it real issue again. Serbia is free, Romania is paritally free. Bulgaria might try to get out while going is good. Entente might not walk in unopposed, but it will walk in. And remember Italy? Once A-H folds they invade again.

And where exactly did you get that figure of a million extra men ready in Britain? If they really had a million spare troops to throw at the Germans in 1917-18, don't you think they would have used them, rather than allowing US involvement in the war and therefore at the peace table?

I read they kept them on Home Isles because theu did not trust command with offensive actions. I will look further and ask other people if they have heard something.

Oh, and in case you didn't read the thread title, the Americans aren't coming in to save the Entente. So, unless your hundreds of thousands of Czech-Americans decide to join the Canadian Army in order to fight against the side the European Czechs are on, I don't think they'll be able to do much more than sit and spin as far as WWI is concerned.

Ever heard of Czech legions? By 1917 the trust in empire was heavily eroded, several prominent politicians were awaiting execution in their cells. And I did not claim hundreds, just one, not that much really.

 

[zoomar]

I voted for CP victory, but stalemate seems about as likely.

Both sides were exhausted by 1918, but I believe the morale boost the British/French got by US entry was more significant that the collapse of Russia was to Germany. In 1918, one can't underestimate the morale difference between getting an influx of a million eager yanks and a redeployment of a million already exhausted and embittered Germans.

Even assuming the German 1918 offensive collapses as in OTL and the allies begin to move, things would be different with the US as a neutral. The allies woulf be less optimistic. Germany might still might approach Wilson to help mediate and armistice, and in this situation realistic German offers might be balanced by equally realistic allied counter offers. At worst, something resembling a "return to prewar borders" armistice among equals might be reached. There would be no allied control commision, surrender of the High Seas Fleet, occupation of the Saar, etc.

What is still open to speculation is the possibility of eventual collapse of the German, Austro-Hungarian, and Ottoman empires as a result of internal revolutionary dynamics. It is realistic to speculate that, by 1918, even outright CP victory might not save these regimes.

 

[The Sandman]

I am not saying it will sleep on roses. But I am saying it won't be ocupied by Germans within a year.

I don't think the Germans will occupy the place either. But they can and will make life very uncomfortable for Czechia if it asserts too much independence.

But collapse of A-H makes it real issue again. Serbia is free, Romania is paritally free. Bulgaria might try to get out while going is good. Entente might not walk in unopposed, but it will walk in. And remember Italy? Once A-H folds they invade again.

I'm working under the assumption that, without the need to launch a spring offensive as soon as possible in order to win before the Americans show up, that the Germans keep their forces in Italy for long enough to knock the Italians out of the war. Given that Caporetto all but destroyed the Italian Army and left CP forces within about 15 miles of Venice, any offensive before the Italians can start rebuilding probably sends them looking for the exits.

Given that after Italy drops out, A-H no longer has an active front to fight on, I expect they manage to hang on until after the war ends, at which point they quietly fall apart. Also, given that in TTL the Germans are not seen as being on the edge of utter military collapse, the Austrians and especially the Bulgarians are likely to be more willing to fight if the Allied troops in Macedonia move north.

And Serbia and Romania, having been fought over, occupied by enemy troops, and thoroughly looted, are in no condition to do anything even if A-H goes under before the cease-fire.

I read they kept them on Home Isles because they did not trust command with offensive actions. I will look further and ask other people if they have heard something.

If you find some info, please post it; while the BEF didn't exactly exhibit stunning military brilliance during WWI, keeping a million potential reinforcements in Britain when the Entente appears to be losing the war seems a bit stupid even for them.

Ever heard of Czech legions? By 1917 the trust in empire was heavily eroded, several prominent politicians were awaiting execution in their cells. And I did not claim hundreds, just one, not that much really.

If the US is actually committed to neutrality (read: attempting to avoid being drawn into the war), I don't think that Wilson would have allowed any volunteer force large enough to be useful to head to Europe. And he was more than enough of a bastard to have effective (if unpleasant) steps taken to avoid such a provocation.

 

[The Sandman]

What is still open to speculation is the possibility of eventual collapse of the German, Austro-Hungarian, and Ottoman empires as a result of internal revolutionary dynamics. It is realistic to speculate that, by 1918, even outright CP victory might not save these regimes.

I'm betting that the Ottomans and Austrians go; the Ottomans were doomed before the OTL American declaration of war, and I don't see how the Austrians can deal with Serbia or Romania in a manner that won't lead to the Hungarians or Slavs tearing apart the Empire. Imperial Germany, however, should survive; having the very concrete gains of Brest-Litovsk to show for their effort goes a long way towards changing the German perception of the war from a catastrophic disaster to a hard-fought victory.

 

[Phoenix]

There were 8 Infantry Divisions and 13 Cyclist Battallions kept in the Home Islands for defence from invasion.

Also, if the French did not force the British to take over more of the line, they could have had more forces in late '17 assault the Germans.

At this time, the French lines had been quiet and defencive, and the Germans had moved nearly half of their toops facing the 100 miles the British held.

The Somme disaster can be partially blamed for this troop movements.

The troops there could have kept more pressure on the Germans, until more ANZACs, Canadians, South Africans and Indians could arrive.

In early 1918, an extra 544,000 British troops were sent to France by the British Govt., which had with held them from Gen. Haig, plus an additional 100,000 plus troops from the other areas of the War, Palestine & Egypt, Italy, and garrisons in India.